Skip to main content

About your Search

20130121
20130129
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7 (some duplicates have been removed)
vulnerable to job losses or any change in the economy or anything that might around in their own lives -- might go wrong in their own lives. they want that safety net. it is not an easy sell, but we have to make the case that what you think is security is not. because, as will soon be obvious in states that have followed this model of a larger and larger public sector and more and more benefits, states like california, illinois, new york, they are going to go bankrupt and come to the federal government for a bailout. we have to be ready to hammer home the point that -- what good is it that you voted for security when, now your benefits will not be able to be paid for. it is no longer a public that can afford it. >> this seems like a deeper pot -- deeper cultural problem. how do you convince them that the government is not their husband? a woman has written about how you convince them, when you have this pop-culture suggesting that guys are losers. dads are losers on every comedy show. how do we fix that environment? policy wise, culturally, this is for anybody. >> it is a huge cultural
of it, how much the circumstances the economy was unable to brand obama. >> the clearest way to look at this is to look at 2010. 2010 was a set -- was a resounding rejection of what obama had done in the first two years. it was a resounding rejection of the intrusiveness expansion of the pyramid. it was a referendum on this kind of hyper liberalism and there was a referendum about the size and reach of government. and it was a pure ideological election. because there were no personalities involved. you weren't voting for president. you want boating up and down on a figure. you were voting on issues and the dominant issue was obama and as a scare, the stimulus committee increase in spending, the expansion of the government. or to put it in a more abstract and grand was the difference between federal and state which was tilting more toward state. when the question is put that way, the country shows itself to be center-right country. had republicans been able to duplicate those conditions, that framework in 2012, they would have won. but it is not the same election. 2010 is almost purel
, the economy, healthcare, reducing the deficit, or addressing climate change. he is respected by leaders of the government, and if you add it all up, i think he is spent most of the last four years leading interagency meetings, hearing people out, listening to them, forging consensus, and making sure policies are implemented and everybody is held accountable. he always holds himself accountable first and foremost. it is no easy task, but through it all denis mcdonough does it with class, integrity and thoughtfulness for other people's point of views. he is the consummate public servant, he plays it straight and that is the kind of teamwork that i want in the white house. time and again i have relied on dennis to help in the outreach to our immigrant and faith communities. he understands that in the end our policies and programs are measured in the concrete differences that they make in the lives of fellow human beings and the values that we advance as americans. he insists on knowing for himself the real world impact of the decisions that we make, so away from the cameras without fanfare
ourselves anew, and vowed to move forward together. together, we determined that a modern economy requires railroads and highways to speed travel and commerce, schools and colleges to train our workers. together, we discovered that a free market only thrives when there are rules to ensure competition and fair play. together, we resolved that a great nation must care for the vulnerable, and protect its people from life's worst hazards and misfortune. through it all, we have never relinquished our skepticism of central authority, nor have we succumbed to the fiction that all society's ills can be cured through government alone. our celebration of initiative and enterprise, our insistence on hard work and personal responsibility, these are constants in our character. but we have always understood that when times change, so must we; that fidelity to our founding principles requires new responses to new challenges; that preserving our individual freedoms ultimately requires collective action. for the american people can no more meet the demands of today's world by acting alone than american sol
going to do for them and the economy and securing their streets and securing their place in the world. that shows in the exit polls, hispanic voters are not single-issue voters. as a republican party we can probably do better by being more welcoming in our rhetoric at times and there is a lot of policies that recognize that we are, not just a nation of immigrants, but a nation of laws. expediting illegal immigration. i have an interpreder the from afghanistan who tries to get a visa but he fails to get a visa because there is not enough visas. he could come here easily lylely but he wants to do the right thing to be a productive citizen. same thing with immigrants that are already here. if they are high-skilled workers or if they are low-skilled migrant workers. we can have policies that have them stay here and not have concerned about returning them to their home country once their visa is up. the problem with comprehensive immigration, the 1986 bill that did pass, you often times get the amnesty without the enforcement because other groups sue and block it. >> not to get into too ma
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7 (some duplicates have been removed)